| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "THEORIES THOMAS PAINE JOHN LOCKE": |
|
|
The Theories of Thomas Paine and John Locke, 2002.
This paper discusses the difference between the firebrand ideas of Thomas Paine and those of Locke as evidenced by comparing the nature of the Glorious Revolution with that of the French Revolution.
2,181 words (approx. 8.7 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 68.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The writer sites Paine?s philosophy as a pragmatic one that would resonate more with the ideas commonly held today than would Locke?s; today?s political rhetoric proves most resonant when it refers to the specifics of budgets and financing. The Lockean world is dependent upon the existence of a frontier, for this enables any man to gain parity with all other men that are able to subsist of their own devises, given that he has merit and the ability to hunt or till the soil Paine?s ideas.
From the Paper
"Monticello, the mansion that Thomas Jefferson designed in the hills of Virginia near the State University that he founded, has three portraits that are to be found on the wall of President Jefferson?s study that have remained there for 200 years. These portraits are of three writers Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton and John Locke. Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence and acquired the Louisiana Purchase form the French, refers to these three as ?the greatest men who ever lived.? Today?s American Republic, however, seldom reflects the sentiments of John Locke aside from the occasional pamphlet of Libertarian rhetoric or op-ed written by the Cato Institute. Political theorists are more apt to cite Galbraith, education experts to mention Dewey, and philosophers to quote Rawls. Modern theorists would be quick to group classical liberalism, which is now almost explicitly considered the domain of libertarian thinkers. This would be a mistake, as it fails to acknowledge the divergence of American though from the Lockian views that underscored the Scottish Enlightenment."
| |
|
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, 2005.
This paper relates that Thomas Hobbes and John Locke represent opposite ends of the spectrum of seventeenth century political philosophy.
3,050 words (approx. 12.2 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Thomas Hobbes, who believed that man was cruel and evil by nature, espoused the idea that only the firm grip of an absolute authority would be successful in governing a society of men; countering this extreme view, John Locke put forth the idea that man was rational and peace-seeking by nature and that any useful system of government must be chosen by men and must serve the best interests of the polity. The author points out that, despite these difference, both philosophers argued their cases within the same terms of debate; both (1) spoke of social contracts and of the nature of man, (2) were concerned with defining the type of government that would be best suited to govern societies, as well as the reasons why man should submit to any form of government at all and (3) were concerned with the ultimate objective of avoiding conflict and violence and thereby assisting their fellow men in the task of peaceful coexistence. The paper summarizes that Hobbes had a dimmer view of mankind than Locke because, in the Hobbesian world, every man is preoccupied with the task of survival and will do anything to meet his goal of self-preservation; whereas, Locke expounds on mankind's virtues and on his innate sense of morality.
From the Paper
"Locke argued a final, crucial point in direct dispute against Hobbes: that man has the natural right to quit government. Locke envisioned Hobbes' ideal of government-by-force as a counterproductive hunting match: "Whereas by supposing they have given up themselves to the absolute arbitrary power and will of a legislator, they have disarmed themselves, and armed him to make a prey of them when he pleases..." Man has thus, in constructing and submitting to an absolute authority, theoretically turned over every one of his natural rights. Where Hobbes wrote that man had a right to quit government only when it was matter of laying down one's life for no just cause, Locke leaves this self-eject option much broader. He even goes so far as to say that when a government begins to fail its people, and undermine its primary intent, the citizens subject to it have not only a right but an obligation to revolt against its power."
| |
|
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, 2006.
A comparison and contrast of Thomas Hobbes' and John Locke's understanding of human nature and the issue of security of life and property.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 4 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Thomas Hobbes and John Locke appear to be very much in agreement in their thoughts related to their understanding of human nature and the issue of security of life and property, and that both philosophers were aware that the desire for gain and for property was the main source of all social conflict. The paper goes on to explains that, in spite of these similar perspectives, Hobbes and Locke actually held very different views of human nature and property. This paper examines those differences.
| |
|
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, 2002.
A comparative analysis of the views of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke on modern political philosophy.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will discuss the philosophy of Hobbes and Locke, and seek to compare their ideas on modern political philosophy. By understanding human nature, origin of the state, the nature of government, and the right of revolution, we can see how they influence ach other through history.
| |
|
Theories of John Locke, 2002.
A discussion of Locke's theories of property, taxation and the state of nature.
1,260 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 1 source, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the theories of the 17th century English political and social philosopher, John Locke, and the effects his ideas had on political events. Locke's theories of property, taxation and the state of nature as they pertain to the individual are explored. Two significant events said to have been influenced by Locke's theories, the "Declaration of Independence" and the "Declaration of the Rights of Man" are discussed.
From the Paper
"According to John Locke, the 17th century English political and social philosopher, although the entire earth and all its riches have been gifted by God to all men (and as such are the common property of the entire mankind), every individual has a ?property? in his own ?person.? Thus the origin of all ?property? is in each ?person? himself. This ?property? of the individual is the labor that he puts into his work during his lifetime. It is Locke?s contention that nobody has any right to such labor but himself. He believed that every individual takes some part of the common ?gift? that God has given to all mankind in the form of the earth?s resources, and by adding to that resource by his own labor an individual makes that resource into his own ?property.? And just as no one has any right to take away a man?s labor, no one has any right to take away this ?property? from an individual, either."
| |
|
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke: Perspectives on Governance, 2005.
Discusses the differences in Hobbes's and Locke's ideas for a framework of governance that would protect the rights of individuals and how these ideas influenced the creation of the Constitution of the United States.
2,085 words (approx. 8.3 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts the different theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke about how a government could best represent the people and ensure their individual rights. The paper notes that Locke believed that a system of checks and balances was essential to a democratic nation and the preservation of individual rights, while Hobbes, also interested in securing the rights of the individual, but having had different life experiences also believed that a strong hand was necessary within a governing body to prevent man from destroying himself. The paper then looks at how both ideologies were influential in the creation of the Constitution of the United States.
From the Paper
"Henry (1999) points out that Locke?s theory of natural law ?gives every man a title to so much out of another?s plenty, as will keep him from extreme want, where he has not means to subsist otherwise (p.1, cited from Locke 1967, 188). That said the right to subsistence according to Locke is a premise underlying Locke?s theories. Man has a right to live and to subsist; this right may be considered a natural right. Taking Locke?s position, one would side with an economic program that argues the case for workmanship as the ideal standard through which people?s rights should be measured. Lock supported productive labor more so than simple ownership (Henry, 1999). Lock suggests that rights should be grounded in theories that involve human nature. Humans by nature are laboring creatures that have a right to reap the rewards of what they sow. They have a right to own property."
| |
|
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, 2002.
This paper looks at the philosphers' ideas on motivation and state of nature.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Thomas Hobbes' and John Locke's assumptions about motivation and the state of nature. It discusses how Locke endorsed limited monarchy and frequent expressions of consent, while Hobbes endorsed absolute monarchy and a sovereign who ruled in perpetuity. Locke supported freedom through government, while Hobbes believed a strong state had to subdue man's aggressive desires.
| |
|
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, 1995.
Compares these political philosophers' views on social contract, individualism, reason, state of nature and property.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 6 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"John Locke and Thomas Hobbes represented the beginning of a real political science in the seventeenth-century, and their conceptions of how government developed and what government should and should not do would be refined and extended by Rousseau and others and would eventually become the basis for the constitutional democracy of the United States. Hobbes was the first to try to put moral and political philosophy on a scientific basis, and Locke continued in this vein. The two find some agreement in their writings, but they also approach the issue from different perspectives. While each sees a relationship between human beings and their government in terms of human beings ceding certain powers to government in order to secure certain protections, Hobbes places more emphasis on civic responsibility, on the responsibility citizens owe to their ..."
| |
|
John Locke's Theory of Natural Law, 2002.
An examination of the premises that Locke bases his theory upon.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 2 sources, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Examines premises that Locke bases his theory upon. Law of God and Civil laws. Belief in superior power of God. Why man's laws can be changed, but not God's. Natural law and the state of nature. Locke's theory of property & property rights. Rule of common reason & equity. Discusses how Locke's 17th Century theory can be applied, or not applied, to the complex modern world.
From the Paper
"John Locke's Theory of Natural Law
Natural law, as Locke saw it, was something above and beyond laws made by Man. "He is quite confident that civil laws do not necessarily oblige the individual conscience, but he maintains there is a law of God which forbids 'disturbance or dissolution of governments'" (Laslett, 1999, p. 35). It is interesting to note that this sort of "natural" law's premises were founded on the belief in the superior power of God, and that God, literally as well as figuratively, created governments that rule, and laws that regulated that rule. It may be obvious, then, that America's Pledge of Allegiance, refers to "one nation under God"- which seems a direct descendant of the idea of natural laws as developed in the seventeenth century, a hundred years before the idea of an American democracy became fact."
| |
|
Thomas Paine, 2006.
A discussion on Thomas Paine's "Common Sense".
870 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper offers a personal opinion on the importance of Thomas Paine's revolutionary document in American history. The author discusses the main ideals and themes in Paine's work, "Common Sense". The paper compares the "Declaration of Independence" and "Common Sense" and states reasons why it is Thomas Paine's work that Americans should idealize and remember.
From the Paper
"Thomas shed new light to the matter and made it a point to emphasize that America can and will survive on it own without any British intervention. He simply made a point that America does not need Great Britain and went on to say that "America would have flourished as much, probably much more, had no European Power had anything to do with her" (Thomas Paine). In "Common Sense", Thomas Paine portrays the British to be greedy for power and control and he clarifies that Britain's intervention is not for the benefit of the American people but rather because she wants control and would've done the same to Turkey for the same motive "viz., the sake of trade and dominion" (Thomas Paine)."
| |
|
Thomas Paine, 2002.
This paper discusses the life and work of Thomas Paine.
1,010 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the life of Thomas Paine and his role in American history and American Literature. The author discusses how Thomas Paine?s imprisonment and the misinterpretations of his writings have dimmed the spotlight on this American hero; however, his writings continue to inspire more than two hundred years later.
From the Paper
"It is difficult to think of the founding of the United States without calling to mind Thomas Paine. Paine?s ?Common Sense? and ?Age of Reason? have become not only part of American history, but part of classic American literature. In ?Common Sense,? Paine wrote, ?The new republican materials, in the persons of the commons, on whose virtue depends the freedom of England? (Paine pg). Paine is perhaps the least revered and celebrated of all the founding fathers, but, perhaps, one of the most patriotic and influential.
Thomas Paine was born January 29, 1737 in Thetford, Norfolk, England. His mother was Anglican, his father was Quaker. The family was poor, and Paine had only a brief education before going to work for his father, and went to sea at age nineteen."
| |
|
Thomas Paine, 2007.
The paper discusses the life of Thomas Paine, one of the most controversial men of the American founding fathers.
1,700 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Thomas Paine dedicated his life to three great causes: the American Revolution, the rights of man and the reform of religion. The author points out that Paine's writings "Common Sense" and "The American Crisis" made him a hero of the American Revolution; however, his attack on the religion of his day in "The Age of Reason" caused him to be ostracized. The paper relates that, as one of the America Revolution's chief pamphleteers, Paine's "plain" style of language helped him explain to the masses his passionate demands for political reform based on his republican views.
From the Paper
"Thomas Paine was born on January 29, 1737 in Thetford, England. His father, Joseph Paine, was a maker of ladies corsets. His mother was Frances Cocke. He was a well-educated child, and stayed in school until the age of thirteen. His parents, both being Quakers were not supporters of poetry, but along with Paine were very enthusiastic about his talent. After leaving school, Paine worked at his father's trade until age eighteen. In 1757, he left for London where he found a job as a corset maker to pay for his studies. There he bought a pair of globes to study astronomy and physics."
| |
|
Thomas Paine, 2007.
An overview of Thomas Paine's greatest works and their influence on American society.
2,076 words (approx. 8.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper details the life and times of political philosopher and writer, Thomas Paine. It examines how, born poor in England, he arrived in America just before the Revolution and devoted his life to three great causes: the American Revolution, religious reform, and the natural rights of man. It looks at how his powerful writings played a significant part in the process of Independence and how some of them also provoked great controversies. It considers whether Paine was a revolutionary pamphleteer and focuses on his very particular pamphlet, "Common Sense" and on the influence he had on the American Revolution.
Outline:
His Main Works and their Context
A Focus on "Common Sense": Paine's Influence on American Independence
From the Paper
"After the United States' victory over England, Paine didn't take part in the establishment of the new republic. He returned to Europe instead and soon played a part in the political debate over the French Revolution and wrote The Rights of Man (1791, 1792) that supported the revolution. In this work, Paine defended the natural equality of all men in the sight of God and their political rights, denounced hereditary monarchy and called for republican principles. Moreover Paine also analysed the basic reasons for great discontentment in Europe and tried to find a solution to poverty, unemployment, illiteracy and war. He proposed the levying of a progressive income tax to finance a social plan to educate the population, to help the poor, to financially support aged people and to create public works for unemployed people."
| |
|
Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine, 2002.
This essay compares the political philosophy of Edmund Burke with that of his leading critic, Thomas Paine.
1,510 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An essay which compares the political philosophy of Edmund Burke with that of his leading critic, Thomas Paine. It argues that Burke?s philosophy was less a reaction to the French Revolution than an idealization of the English constitution which was created for the purpose of disarming those in England who might have drawn upon revolutionary principles to foster change at home. Paine?s philosophy is distinguished from Burke?s chiefly by the fact that it takes a much more critical attitude to the past.
From the Paper
"Yet as praise for Burke?s philosophy seems detached from any particular enthusiasm for the late 18th-century English state, it seems that Burke?s political philosophy is routinely analyzed in a way that completely abstracts it from the political order it was intended to eulogize and exempt from further change. The problem with this abstract approach is that it bestows upon Burke?s philosophy the power to legitimize any political order simply because it has subsisted into a venerable old age. In other words, if the Third Reich had lasted a thousand years, it would also be entitled to similar esteem as the fruit of generations of human wisdom. It is hard, however, to see the genuine wisdom in a philosophy which blithely ratifies the past, without developing clear criteria to distinguish between the parts which might be allowed to continue to subsist without harm, and those which will only yield harm if left uncorrected."
| |
|
Thomas Paine's 'Common Sense', 2007.
A discussion regarding the document 'Common Sense' by Thomas Paine versus the practical genius of George Washington.
1,513 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at 'Common Sense', a document by Thomas Paine and compares it to the thinking and action of George Washington.
The paper argues that Paine's 'Common Sense' was not practical, whereas Washington's view of government was necessary to create a united nation that could do business with the world, and also keep popular forces under enough control so that true freedom of speech could be enjoyed by all, not simply the democratic majority.
From the Paper
"Paine wrote his document in 1776, during the first flush of American enthusiasm over war against England, and during one of the most sustained periods of rage against the increasingly prohibitive British system of taxation upon the colonies. Washington, however, saw the American colonialists as potentially overmatched, especially as the war drew on in the years afterwards. Of his minutemen, in comparison to the more systematically trained British soldiers, Washington wrote: "Place them behind a parapet, a breastwork, stone wall, or anything that will afford them shelter, and, from their knowledge of a firelock, they will give a good account of the enemy, but I am as well convinced...they will not stand up at a plain." (Morgan, 1982, p.42) This is why Washington deployed guerrilla tactics when fighting the better-trained English army, who also outnumbered the colonists."
|
|
|
